Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring on Friday urged the nation's highest court to review Virginia's same-sex marriage case — saying the issue is one of fundamental fairness and that Virginia's case is an ideal one to lay down the law of the land.

Herring said that because of Virginia's "stringent" rules on same-sex marriage and the lack of "procedural pitfalls" to its case, the U.S. Supreme Court should select the Old Dominion's case — from among others around the country — to decide the historic dispute.

"The sweeping nature of Virginia's same-sex marriage ban and the adverseness of the parties' interests make this an excellent vehicle to resolve the controversy," Herring wrote in the petition. "This case is an ideal vehicle to answer the exceptionally important question presented."

In February, a federal judge in Norfolk declared Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Her ruling was recently upheld by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over five states.

Same-sex marriage opponents promise to appeal that ruling on the basis that the lower courts got it wrong. But Herring, for his part, took the unusual step of filing a petition for appeal in a court decision that he agrees with.

That was done, his office said, in part to get a quicker review than might otherwise take place.

That is, the Supreme Court can now determine at its September conference whether it wants to take up Virginia's case next Spring. An appeal by same-sex marriage opponents, on the other hand, might not be filed in time to be considered in September.

Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, said there's a "race" of sorts between states and litigants wanting the Supreme Court to select their case for review.

Utah's attorney general and a petitioner in Oklahoma have recently filed petitions asking the Supreme Court to hear those states' same-sex marriage cases, Tobias said. Meantime, oral arguments have just occurred or will be heard soon in three other federal appeals courts.

"It has the appearance of people racing to the Supreme Court," Tobias said. "They're all filing early. There's a feeling of wanting to be there as soon as possible, and not to let (other states) get too far ahead."

To be considered first, he said, it's best to file sooner rather than later. "The justices come back from the summer, and there are a couple thousand petitions waiting," Tobias said. "The thinking is that it's best to be there as early as you can."

The Supreme Court is widely expected to hear the same-sex marriage issue in the next couple of years, or as soon as early 2015.

The high court could uphold existing state bans on same-sex marriage, as marriage traditionalists want. Or it could outlaw the bans in dozens of states at once, as is sought by progressives.

If the high court decides not to take up the matter, the 4th Circuit decision will stand, and gay and lesbian couples will be able to get married in Virginia and the circuit's other states.

Herring, a Democrat, announced shortly after taking office in January that he would not defend Virginia's same-sex marriage ban. Since that time, he's become one of the gay rights movement's most prominent supporters in Virginia.

Still, he has taken a more measured approach than have the case's plaintiffs. For example, he asked for a delay of the recent appeals court decision and promised to continue enforcing the state's same-sex marriage ban "until a definitive judicial ruling can be obtained."

Herring, who represents State Registrar Janet M. Rainey, one of the original defendants in the Norfolk case, says he's "a proper petitioner," and is legally allowed to appeal a ruling he agrees with.

Herring quoted a past Supreme Court decision that "even in cases where the Government largely agrees" with a lower court decision, the government can still ask for a review because it's the entity enforcing the "challenged law."

The plaintiffs in the Virginia case are Tim Bostic and Tony London, a gay couple from Norfolk, and Carol Schall and Mary Townley of Chesterfield County.

In the petition, Herring termed Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage "one of the most stringent in the country."

As passed in a 1975 law and 2006 state constitutional amendment, the ban outlaws civil unions, bars adoption by same-sex couples, blocks the recognition of same-sex marriages from other states, and doesn't grant property, medical and contract rights to gay and lesbian couples.

He quoted strong language from other lower court decisions around the country — that there's "no asterisk" next to the 14th Amendment, that "we're a better people than what these (gay marriage bans) represent," and that gay and lesbian couples are "no different than the family down the street."

"These courts and many others have written in historically self-conscious language," Herring wrote. "They know that future generations will judge us by how we treat these fellow Americans. That issue warrants the Court's attention now."

He added: "It may seem that this issue has moved rapidly since (a 2003 Supreme Court decision) held that our Constitution prevents States from criminalizing the intimate relations of gay Americans. But how much longer must these citizens and their children wait to realize the promise of equal justice under law?"

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring's office on Tuesday said a recent court decision overturning the state's same-sex marriage ban should be put on hold as the case is appealed to the nation's highest court.

One side was smiling, the other subdued as the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage, the second federal appeals court to reject state efforts to say marriage was just for couples of one man and one woman.

Plaintiffs who challenged the constitutionality of a gay marriage law in Virginia arrive for a press conference Friday in Norfolk after the judge hearing the case ruled the Virginia law unconstitutional Thursday evening.